AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

French film scholar Andre Bazin, upon seeing Citizen Kane – directed by Orson Welles in 1941 – highlighted its use of fake newsreel and deep focus as ‘cinematic realism’. This contradicts many other scholars, who argue that the film is self-conscious and artificial. In my opinion, the realism of Citizen Kane is a matter of two legitimate viewpoints, which diverge when considering epistemological and contextual grounds and other stylistic elements. However, despite these deviations, Bazin’s analysis does seem outdated - a victim of its own context and – even in some cases – slightly misinformed.

Bazin’s concept of ‘cinematic realism’ differs epistemologically from many other scholars’, an explanation for the conflicting analyses of Citizen Kane. Bazin’s definition of realism is indeed literal - “the object itself, freed from the conditions of time and space that govern it” (Black 40) –meaning that Bazin’s realism is a comment on the authenticity of the image rather than narrative considerations. Compared to other contemporaneous American movies, Citizen Kane does embody Bazin’s realistic ideas – the long take, deep focus and the moving camera all comparatively near to actual vision (40) – bringing the viewer back to “real conditions of perception” (Bazin 80). Bazin’s realism centres around recreating reality within film form itself, where the camera represents what is the ‘real’ world (Black 41). One example is the replacement of standard transitions with long takes in deep focus (Bazin 77). The shot in which Susan has just attempted suicide includes - all in deep focus - a close-up of a glass, spoon and medicine bottle, a mid-shot of Susan in bed and a long shot of Kane entering the room. Other filmmakers, he suggests, would have cut that one shot into several individual shots. Instead, this shot not only conforms to realistic time and space considerations but allows the viewer to identify implicit relations within the shot rather than having it “cut up like a dismantled engine.” (78) This idea is reinforced by cinematographer Gregg Toland who wanted the audience to “feel it was looking at reality, rather than merely a movie.” (Carringer, “The Making Of” 83) Thus, Bazin’s realism revolves around the strict representation of reality within film form.

Other interpretations look at realism from a thematic and narrative frame. A ‘realist’ movie’s narrative does not defer from what would actually occur in reality, the camera itself is the film’s world only separation from the real (Black 40). Although Citizen Kane does not defer from reality as much as a fantasy film would, the film could hardly be called ‘realistic’ in this sense. One example is the film’s flashback viewpoint structure. Although the majority of the narrative is the recalled memories of many of the character’s, the flashbacks themselves are rarely actually shown from the said character’s perspective. This differs from the reality of memory recall, where one remembers events from one’s own perspective – a feature that Welles’ fails to comply with. This style of realism is more suited to films such as Vittorio De Sica’s “The Bicycle Thief”, and other Italian Neo-Realist films released after Bazin viewed Kane (Black 40). I would also conjecture that the more recent proliferation of documentary and independent filmmaking has made Citizen Kane look, to a modern viewer, far less realistic than at its time of release. Thus, epistemologically speaking, multiple viewpoints of Kane’s realism are acceptable and persuasive.

The context in which the film is viewed and analysed is important in determining whether Citizen Kane is an example of ‘cinematic realism’. Bazin, who saw the film in 1946, would have made his argument based on recent technological advances in filmmaking. The customary shooting technique of 1930’s American films was to use mostly shallow focus and frequent transitions. This is because the arc lamps used for lighting were too loud for sound films and the incandescent lamps that replaced them were too dim for deeper focus (Carringer, “The Making Of” 73).  In compensation maximum aperture settings were applied, reducing focus and softening the image quality (74). Welles however used new silent arc lamps and a new camera which allowed for deep focus technology (73) – and providing the type of ‘realist’ montage that Bazin revered – long takes maintaining time and space and sharper images furthering a sense of viewing the real (74). This is apparent in the scene where Kane’s future is discussed by his mother, father and Thatcher while Charles plays in the far background. This is shot in clear deep focus, in one long take and using a moving camera rather than using transitions to cut up the dramatic tension – allowing the viewer to derive meaning from the shot itself – rather than viewing a film with soft images and shallow focus.

Others have not worked within such a close context to these developments, and views of ‘realism’ and its relationship to Citizen Kane have changed – especially after later movements like Italian neo-realism (Black 40).  To laypeople, Citizen Kane is often regarded as epitomising everything that is the general Hollywood style – especially the seemingly clichéd “News on the March” section and the rapid newspaper montage (Carringer, “Citizen Kane” 41) – rather than as realistic. This is possibly because Welles’ innovative techniques have now become part of established filmmaking practice but also because later film movements have rendered Bazin’s realist critique as somewhat outdated (41). Some scholars have even pointed to Kane being less realist than its Hollywood predecessors – referring to the film as self-conscious rather than a formal recreation of reality (33-34). By 1941 the Hollywood system had created a naturalness of style that maximised the lucidity and clarity of films – rendering a viewer unaware of the process of filmmaking rather than drawing attention to it (33-34). This generally included fixed eye-level shots, inconspicuous camera angles and rhythmic editing (33-34). Welles employs the opposite; rarely cutting and using odd angles and deep focus which immediately draw attention to the filmmaking process. An example is the conversation between Leland and Kane directly after Kane’s political defeat. The scene is shot from an extremely low angle, in deep focus and using several long takes. Rather than representing reality, this scene does the opposite – using an extremely unlikely viewpoint angle for a person and utilizing a clear deep focus that allows the viewer to see aspects of mise-en-scene that would never be so clear in real life. In this regard, rather than being realist, Citizen Kane draws attention to formal aspects of filmmaking and uses artificial techniques instead of representing what a person could actually witness.

The “News on the March” section at the beginning of the film also seems to counter Bazin’s viewpoint. The section incorporates many of the aspects of earlier American films such as the repeated use of wipe transitions and the typical editing structure of a long shot followed by a mid-shot and then a close-up (Damico 51-52). This starkly contrasts to later in the film – the deep focus, long take and moving camera. The section even breaks Bazin’s preferred narrative style – where meanings can be construed without the use of transitions and montage (58) – such as the shots of aspects of Kane’s empire, signifying his wealth and power. Although this section seems to argue against Citizen Kane being a realist film it may achieve the contrary and actually betray the realist intentions of the filmmakers themselves. The segment is a parody of the popular March of Time film newsreels of the 1930s, highlighting the inaccuracy of minimal biographical facts to portray someone’s life – as we shall see during the rollercoaster of the rest of the film (51). Additionally, “News on the March” could be seen as somewhat of a joke by Welles, using the classical techniques that Welles is about to ignore in his new ‘realistic’ approach to filmmaking – particularly deep focus (58). A strident example of this comparison is the hesitant pan showing Kane’s storage crates during the newsreel segment and the final, smooth and clear deep focus crane shot over Kane’s entire collection at the film’s end.

Not so reconcilable is the problems with many of the deep focus shots within the film, particularly the shot of Susan’s attempted suicide which, is often used by Bazin as evidence of Welles’ realism (Bazin 77). Rather than being an undisturbed image of reality, this shot is the exact opposite. The shot is not actually in deep focus but is an in-camera matte shot (Carringer, “The Making Of” 82). The foreground of the image was focussed, lit and shot first, then the tape rewound, the image refocused and lit and the background shot before being transplanted onto the first. Bazin claims that the deep focus allowed for meaning to be read within the long take deep focus without the need for transition or montage, just like real life (78). However, the shot reveals Welles as an illusionist rather than a realist and the film as being artificial rather than a stolid example of realism. It is hard to imagine how Bazin, with his main example discredited, would have reconciled his thesis. The film is flamboyant and excessive rather than realistic. This is notable in the exhilarating montage of Kane’s first marriage disintegration – the pace of the edit and the changing costumes and speech – all purely exhibitionist, self-conscious features advertising Welles’ innovation and talent rather than being a homage to real life (Garis 44).

The level of Citizen Kane’s ‘cinematic realism’ has been debated by many film scholars since Andre Bazin first saw the film. Bazin highlights the film’s ability to faithfully recreate reality through film form. While the difference in opinion in regards to Citizen Kane’s realism is largely explained by epistemologically, the context of analysis and different perspectives on the “News on the March” section, deep focus and other parts of the film have created two conflicting theses. While Bazin’s opinion is still credible, his work has become a victim of age and misinformation. Therefore, to call Citizen Kane a masterpiece of ‘realism’ is, in my opinion, fanciful.

Works Cited

Bazin, Andre. Orson Welles. New York: Harper and Row, 1978. Print.

Black, David Alan. “Cinematic Realism and the Phonographic Analogy.” Cinema Journal 26.2 (1987): 39-50. JSTOR. Web. 28/09/2010.

Carringer, Robert L. “Citizen Kane.” Journal of Aesthetic Education 9.2 (1975): 32-49. JSTOR. Web. 28/09/2010.

Carringer, Robert L. The Making of Citizen Kane. Berkeley: The University of California Press, 1985. Print.

Damico, James. “Kane’s Newsreel as a Cutting Critique.” Cinema Journal 16.2 (1977): 51-58. JSTOR. Web. 01/10/2010.

Garis, Robert. The Films of Orson Welles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print